LH Martin Institute

Welcome to the final issue of the Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management for 2021. Along with two book reviews for some summer holiday reading, there are seven articles of interest in this issue.  These articles can be freely accessed by logging into your ATEM account, with the Journal access under the Resources tab.  Once you’ve logged in and accessed the Journal, the links below will take you to the individual articles.

As we approach the end of 2021, we look forward to improving conditions in 2022.  Although 2022 is unlikely to see Australian higher education enter its post-Covid-19 phase, in this issue we have two forward-looking articles. Owen Hogan, Michael Charles and Michael Kortt examine COVID-19-related implications for business schools, while Sarah O’Shea, Paul Koshy and Catherine Drane focus on student equity.

‘Business education in Australia: COVID-19 and beyond’ by Owen Hogan, Michael B. Charles & Michael A. Kortt  doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2021.1926616

‘The implications of COVID-19 for student equity in Australian higher education’ by Sarah O’Shea, Paul Koshy & Catherine Drane doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2021.1933305

For our managers, we have two articles on perennial topics that will remain on the agenda for years to come:  finances and workload models. Paul Cropper and Christopher Cowton examine financial scenario modelling and what it actually includes in the UK.  On workload models, Richard Goerwitz unsurprisingly also finds wide variation within a US university but offers a solution for ‘transparently analysing and comparing departmental teaching workloads in ways that promote a sense of fairness and that facilitate data-driven decision making’.

‘Financial scenario modelling: a study of UK universities’ by Paul Cropper & Christopher J. Cowton doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2021.1888846

‘Comparing and assessing department-level instructional workloads: a study in data management’ by Richard L. Goerwitz doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2021.1889448

Although it feels somewhat nostalgic to discuss internationalisation, we can anticipate Chinese universities will continue to expand their global influence beyond 2021.  However, far less is known about the internationalisation of regional Chinese universities.  Xi Xi and Kate Rowlands find surprising motivations for using it as a means to ‘tick boxes’ and gain ‘political, academic and financial resources from the government’.  Xiaojie Li, John Haupt and Jenny Lee examine options for internationalisation at home versus abroad, examining the complex factors that underpin choices by students in a China-US law course.

‘An Ignored Player in Internationalisation: Why and How Does a Chinese Regional University Internationalise?’ by Xi Xi and Kate E. Rowlands doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2021.1899559

‘Student mobility choices in transnational education: Impact of macro-, meso- and micro-level factors’ by Xiaojie Li, John Haupt and Jenny Lee doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2021.1905496

Finally, we have Luke Wakely’s article on the difficulties transitioning from professional practice to academe, with recommendations for individual and systemic support.  Luke’s paper was developed from an eLAMP capstone paper, which demonstrates that good practitioner papers can be developed from a range of different sources.

‘Does the culture of academia support developing academics transitioning from professional practice?’ by Luke Wakely doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2021.1905495

Read the Current Issue

2020 Winners

Following a rigorous selection process by the journal editors and evaluation by the three members of the Best Article Committee, the 2020 Best Article Award was awarded to:

‘Responding to student plagiarism in Western Australian universities: the disconnect between policy and academic staff’ by Carmela de Maio, Kathryn Dixon and Shelley Yeo (Curtin University)

Carmela de Maio and colleagues’ article on staff responses to potential plagiarism was highly commended by the Committee members for its relevance to our Journal and potential impact. In our opinion, it is precisely the type of article that our Journal seeks to publish.

Student plagiarism is a critical topic for government, regulators and institutional managers, underpinning the integrity of the higher education system. However, most research focuses on student behaviours or policy frameworks for preventing plagiarism. Far less research examines policy implementation and staff behaviours, or the potential disconnect with policy objectives. de Maio and colleagues’ interviews revealed important tensions faced by academics between prioritising the students’ needs, the institution’s policy goals and their own careers.

The feedback from the three Committee members described the article as ‘very well situated within the Journal’s aims’, ‘an important paper, with a clear contribution’ and ‘very useful findings’. de Maio and colleagues’ research reminds us that no plagiarism policy, however well crafted, can achieve its goals without the support of academics. Academics are critical to detecting plagiarism and (rightly) have considerable discretion over how they respond to potential plagiarism incidents. However, stressed, overworked and insecurely employed academics may understandably turn a blind eye to plagiarism, particularly if institutional policies are time-consuming or require extensive substantiation.

Highly commend runners-up

The Journal would also like to highly commend two runners-up for the Award, which were equally well assessed by the Committee.

‘Factors influencing dropout and academic performance: an Australian higher education equity perspective’ by Ian W. Li and David R. Carroll

Ian Li and David Carroll were commended by multiple Committee members for the thoroughness and quality of their article, including a ‘very clear and accessible explanation of method and findings’. The article’s ‘impact could be significant in terms of social justice implications’ and certainly should be considered by government and institutional managers when seeking to address these goals.

‘Interrogating strategies and policies to advance women in academic leadership: the case of Hong Kong’ by Sarah Jane Aiston, Chee Kent Fo and Wing Wah Law.

Sarah Jane Aiston and colleagues’ study was positively reviewed across all key criteria, but particularly for style, with all three Committee members rating it highly. One Committee member summed it up as follows: ‘Participant voice is judiciously used and provides a rich picture. Extremely engaging style of writing… very focused within the key aims of the journal in that it foregrounds policy and management and identifies the lack of policy impact in management practice and therefore the lived experiences of the participants.’

Best Article Awards Honor Roll

A brief history of the Journal’s contents and authors during the first thirty years has been written by (former editor) Ian Dobson. The paper is entitled ‘The Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management: an output analysis’, published in Volume 31 No. 1 (2009) of the Journal. The pdf can be found here, called The History of the Journal.